The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2009/Thumbs/20090312_bluerose_package.jpg)

From today's Tulsa World: http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090312_11_0_RiverP587626 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090312_11_0_RiverP587626)
River Parks Authority on Thursday directed staff to negotiate a contract with Tom Dittus to resurrect the Blue Rose Cafe on the east bank of the Arkansas River.

Dittus was one of two local restaurant entrepreneurs to submit a proposal for a riverfront, full-service restaurant to replace the former River Edge Bistro and Cafe at 19th Street.

Elliot Nelson, who owns El Guapo’s and McNellie’s also submitted a plan.

The restaurant site will sit on about a 3.81 acres bounded on the west by the river and on the east by Riverside Drive at 19th Street.
 

Here's last Friday's Tulsa World article with additional information:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090311_11_A13_Thesea528327&archive=yes (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090311_11_A13_Thesea528327&archive=yes)
Dittus is proposing to reopen the Blue Rose Cafe with a design that will give a sense that the restaurant is floating.

"The experience is intended to be one where you can experience the park, the river and the city's people as one," the proposal states. "It will be a comfortable place to relax and unwind."

The restaurant would be a 3,000-square-foot, marina-style space that could accommodate 100 patrons inside and as many as 90 on the deck.

An outdoor stage and amphitheater also is proposed.

The plan is to resurrect the Blue Rose Cafe's menu, featuring its popular blackened chicken sandwich and cheese fries. The moderately priced menu also would include burgers, salads and drinks.

If chosen, Dittus said, the restaurant's name might be altered to reflect its new home on the river.  

The drawing looks cool, and I like the idea of hanging out on the deck by the water... But I hope it won't totally "turn it's back" on the park area. 

The great thing about River's Edge was that it was integrated into the park.  That's what made it perfect for kids and families and people with dogs.  Your kids could play football in the park, while you enjoyed a beer and some live music.  Families could picnic on the grass while listening to a concert.  Or you could hang out on the patio with friends and dogs and have a beer.

The other thing that made it great was that it was a neighborhood joint.  The kind of place people walked or biked to...instead of driving. 

At 3,000 SF, will the zoning laws require more parking?  (If so, this is the perfect "case study" to seek a change to the zoning code for parking requirements:  allowing bike racks and walkability to substitute for parking spaces.) 

I just hope we won't be trading park space for parking lots to accomodate this! 

I am not upset with this decision, just surprised by it.  I would have thought that Elliot, being the darling of downtown, would have had this in the bag (considering the current administration's major downtown-centric ideologies).  Perhaps the River Parks Authority is far enough removed from the mayor's office that it didn't matter?

I totally agree. The best thing about River's Edge was not the scenic view but the people watching. You have to have a back to the restaurant to bring in deliveries, but there should be a place to sit closer to the trail.

I wonder if they will tear down the River's Edge building? The smartest thing to do would be to make it into an Anex and sell beverages and snacks.

X edited to correct incorrect word usage issue.

Animals wouldn't be allowed "in" a restaurant and I agree that was part of the draw for me to River's Edge.  I like Tom and Elliot both, and think either could do a great job with this, so I really didn't have a preference one way or the other who got the RFP so long as it serves the citizens well and doesn't impede the pedestrian flow around it.

I like the design also, in that it levers over the river.  But I have some fears:

1) That they will turn their back on the park.  A dumpster and deliver lane would make the park less attractive.

2) No beer sales "to go" so I can sit by the river or whatever.

3) EXISTING STRUCTURE ALONG THE RIVER!  Currently there is a concrete structure there commonly used for sitting, river watching, duck feeding, and people watching.  The rendering seems to indicate this public space goes and is replaced by a restaurant.  Mixed bag there.

I HOPE:

4) They merge it into the park.  By having the deck at trail level and loosely separating it with a wooden railing or something.  Having deliveries on the side or just walk them in instead of driven up.  Hide the dumpster, maybe even roll it to the far end of the parking lot during the day or something . . .

5) They have public bathrooms or refurbish the ones at the Rivers Edge.

6) Snacks and beer "to go."  My boy likes to play at the park just down the trail.  I liked to sit and people watch.  It was nice to get some nachos, chips, or a hot dog with a beer and combine the two.  Or play frisbee or whatever.  Sitting on that deck it wouldn't work very well.

7) Animals.  I hope animals are allowed on the deck.  I loved bringing my dogs down to the Rivers Edge.

8) Live music outside.  Nice summer evening.  Family and friends.  Some dogs laying here and there.  A few beers, some fine people watching, a little food... and live music.  Is there a better summer evening?
- - -

Looking forward to seeing what they do.  I hope it is not "just" a restaurant.  It really needs to fill a community void IMHO.

Can you take beer "to go" in Oklahoma?  My guess would be no.

I think beer to go was frowned upon by River's Edge.

Isn't it some kind of arcane Oklahoma law that if an establishment serves beer/alcohol of any sort, that once sold it cannot be taken off the premises?  That seems to be the case nearly everywhere you go in town.

It is true.  What I meant was not mandatory kept inside the premise.   Take it out on a deck that can see that park.  Or over to sit in the grass.  Or a few feet away to toss a Frisbee.   

I'm not looking to take a 6 pack home.

Unless it's closed off by the police like Mayfest I believe.  But no harder than 3.2 can leave in any situation.  It has to be a "food product" for you to walk around with it.

Hmmm, indeed the main thing I liked about the old Rivers Edge was the people watching. From what I can tell of the rendering. I dont like it. I liked being able to kick back, look towards the river and see people go by.  I liked how the restaurant was part of the flow of people. You could rollerblade right up and get a drink. The people sitting on the grass, at the tables, musicians, people biking,walking, rollerblading by... were all together. It was great. You could have done something new and improved upon what made the place so unique and attractive in the first place. Not done just the opposite.   

One of the things newcomers often ask when they first get to Tulsa is. "Where are the good people watching spots?" And NO the friggin mall doesnt count. We have precious few good people watching spots and looks like we just took a good one and instead of building something new and better, as we all hoped, they turned it into crap. They just didnt get it at all. So sad. Jeeeez.

I think the artist brings up a valid point...I do think the people watching element is important...however, there might be good people watching on the deck, since there will be 90 people on there with you...and as a runner, having people leer at me struggling down the path while they sat and guzzled Bud Light was not my favorite thing,...so it depends on what side of the people watching dynamic you are on... haha.

Well I was hoping whatever replaced the Rivers Edge would be similar in scale. And for partially selfish reasons because I live right across the street and hopes this doesn't block my river view.  >:(

Mayfest is 3.2 I believe.

I like the schematic design, I hope it stays contemporary with maybe a mix of wood and aluminum siding.  This would make an ideal 'green' project.

My favorite thing about Rivers Edge was that you could incorporate it into a walk or bike ride around the river... You didn't have to "go in" to an establishment.  You could just plop down for a few minutes and take it all in. 

If the music was good, I would commit to a longer stay and a beer.  If I spotted friends, I might decide to join them.  If the music was not my taste, I'd just walk on down the path.

I doubt I will ever just "pop in" to a bar in my sweats and sneakers.

Can someone explain to me how a 3,000 square foot structure, built on piers over the river, with kitchen equipment and other fixtures, etc... can be built for $392,000?

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090313_11_A1_Thisar764511 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090313_11_A1_Thisar764511)

As a person who lives nearby, uses the trails and hangs out in that areas all the time... this disturbs me on multiple levels.

3,000-square-feet with capacity for 216 patrons (116 inside and 100 outside) -- that just seems huge and completely out of scale to the area.  And capacity for 216?  Where will they all park?  We definitely can’t add more parking here without destroying the park, but according to current zoning laws, we would have to.  The cool thing about River’s Edge is that most people walked or rode bikes, it was open and inviting, it was a good public gathering space.  People could stop for a drink while walking their dogs.  Sometimes the tables would all be full and people would spill out to the picnic tables or bring picnic blankets.  That was cool.  But I don’t think I ever saw anything close to 90 people there all at once, much less 216. 

I very concerned about the length of the process.  18 months of construction is a long time, taking over that area of the park for a year and a half.  And construction almost always takes longer than estimated.  Will the construction be in the way of or inhibit park usage in any way?  Plus with all of the other processes they have to complete before they even get started on construction...It could be a few years.

I’m also concerned about the ducks that hang out there all the time on the bank.  I love watching people bring their children to the park to feed the ducks.  And what about the public access to the river’s edge?  It looks like that area is being removed, and now the only way to be at the river’s edge is by being a customer of the restaurant.  The design (and I admit you can’t tell a lot from one photo) seems insensitive to the park users.

I’m glad a locally owned restaurant is going to be there instead of a chain.  I’m just concerned about the scale and its effect on the park and ability to be a true public gathering spot with this current design.  I’m also concerned about the overhead they’re getting themselves into and how likely they are to succeed if they don’t get the numbers they expect. 

Here are a few photos I took at River's Edge on a busy day:

(http://rjfbartistics.smugmug.com/photos/210250554_EU2Bb-S.jpg)

(http://rjfbartistics.smugmug.com/photos/210250507_4gfZe-S.jpg)

(http://rjfbartistics.smugmug.com/photos/210249066_fGB5n-S.jpg)

(http://rjfbartistics.smugmug.com/photos/210250536_DLE77-S.jpg)

Fun times.

I don't know that the zoning code will have much to say with respect to parking.  The Arkansas river is zoned agriculture; technically, no restaurant would be allowed.  My guess is that they will find some sort of special exception to allow it, and the BOA will set the number of parking spaces.  Really, 3,000 square feet wouldn't require that much parking.  If you went strictly by the zoning code, a restaurant that big would only need 30 parking spaces.  That's smaller than the parking lot next to Camilles.  Personally, I don't see how you could seat that many people in a restaurant that small.

Even as few as 30 additional parking spaces could really reduce the quality of the park.  Do you think they would consider making due with the current parking that is already there, with the understanding that many people would use bicycles or be pedestrians?  ...I just know how "suface-parking-crazy" we can sometimes be in this town. ;)

There are already existing parking lots to the north and south of this location.  I would make a huge stink if this proposal required an increase in surface parking. 

The BOA and the Riverparks need to make damn sure they don't screw up the park to create a  big surface parking lot for this bar.   If they don't calculate bike racks and pedestrians when considering "parking requirements" it will be an utter farce.

In fact, if I were the Blue Rose, I would market this very thing:  "Walk or Bike in and get 10% off!"   (Or half-price appetizers, or $3 burgers, or whatever.)  Or you could issue walk/bike cards, and get a stamp every time you show up via foot or bike...earn a free entree every 10 trips, or whatever.

(Or they could create "I Bike to Blue Rose" T-shirts... to help spread the concept.)

Is this Authority entirely bound by city rules for zoning and parking? My understanding is that they don't care much what the city wants since they are partially funded by the city, the county and contributors. There have always been "special case" scenarios because of proximity to the river and multiple funding.

All good points RB. Sensitivity to park users is not their strong suit.

I hope they go with a green design, maybe even LEED certification.  No new parking (plenty of spots in the existing lot and on the streets), more bike racks, enhancement of the park, and better defined 'river's edge' providing public access to the river itself through a beach or boardwalk.  With its location in a park along the river I hope they look into sustainable design i.e. maximize daylighting, planting native vegetation, utilizing recycled/local materials, etc.

My feeling is that the Blue Rose and RiverParks will deal with the issue of parking before it gets to the BOA - not necessarily suggesting they will come up with the right scheme however I would suspect the two entities would walk to the BOA together with an agreed upon design and unless it's incredibly harsh the BOA's not going alter it...unless they are compelled by public input.

It may be worth it to call on RiverParks to provide input now before the design is beyond the conceptual stage.  Does anyone know Tom Dittus personally? 

Again, I just have a feeling that the City's BOA is going to be hardpressed to change something that's a semi-public project...unless some of us decide to charge the dias during the public hearing and make some compelling arguments.

Of course, I (we?) may be jumping the gun and they may come with some killer plan that works the restaurant into the trail and river magically without providing any more surface parking...for cars!

Dittus will need more than just a good plan to succeed in the River Parks regardless of the location and design. Hopefully, he has close support of one of their moneyed darlings. Otherwise, RPA has a long checkered history of being impossible to deal with on a regular basis. The only exception was Rivers Edge and that was not a typical business arrangement. Selling beer in a public park on a daily basis from a publicly funded building? It was always believed that someone knew where the bones were buried....

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090709_11_0_TheRiv809032

"The River Parks Authority on Thursday approved a 30-year ground lease so that the Blue Rose Cafe can be resurrected on the east bank of the Arkansas River.

Tom Dittus, a member of Swamphouse Partners LLC, which is pursuing the project, said the goal is for patrons to be eating burgers and other meals at the restaurant by Feb. 15."

Does anyone know exactly where the restaurant is to be located? In the rendering it looks like it will be built partly over the river. But they might keep the River's Edge location? Add 30 parking spaces? There is a nice little seating area turnout, the former River's Edge and a playground all in that area. Are those all staying? While I do want river development I can't say I wanted it to be on that kind of scale. I can't visualize how this will work.

"There can be no competition for the restaurant within 300 yards."

Not a fan of this. I was hoping this would be the beginning of a River District. Guess not.

No competition? Or no food/drink oriented competition? That leaves out any festival activity, sno-cones, fund raisers etc on the east side of the river in that area. I hope the neighbors enjoy their new biker bar and those sweet sounding hogs.

I was wondering about that too.  The pipes will be heard for many blocks.

^Exactly why I had wished Elliot Nelson would have won out over Dittus.

30 year lease? How many restaurants in Tulsa have survived 30 years? That gives him a lease that he can pass on to heirs or sell to others as long as the name continues. A nice saleable asset provided at taxpayer expense. 10 years would have been sufficient.

And no competition within 300 yards, if enforceable, is regrettable. That would go all the way to Veterans Park! Maybe even across the river. Smaller concessions like hot dog carts, shaved ice, etc. will be denied. Such visionaries.

I agree the 30 year lease coupled with a 300 yard exclusion is a bit much.  Is there anywhere else in the city that has such a contract?  An exclusive zone of operation for 30 years.  And yes, I too was hoping for a river district to start up.  How much are they paying annually on this lease?

But, under what provisions did the River's Edge operate?  I don't recall seeing any carts near their operation either. 

I quickly scaled out a 300 yard radius, it appears designed to cover the surrounding parking.  Which makes sense I guess.  If I was opening up a restaurant I wouldn't want competition in my parking area.  But still . . .

I don't think they need to add any parking, there is lot next to it plus another lot to the north that can be used. 

OT, but looking at that aerial it would be really cool to see more higher density residential development around Veterans Park along 21st and 18th.  That could be a nice urban park if the area were more developed around it.

No one is going to invest that much money for a 10 year lease......

I think we are jumping to conclusions without reading the text of the actual lease.  As I recall from the article, the lease is for 10 years, then there are five year options tacked on totalling 30 years.  If RPA (and Tulsans in general) really want river-side entertainment and dining, there has to be incentive for an owner/developer to invest money in constructing a permanent fixture.  A year-to-year lease or even five year lease would not be attractive to a serious investor.  

I would assume the "no competition" clause only applies between the lessee and lessor.  If someone wanted to tear down one of the apartment complexes across the street and build a "Red Rose Cafe" there's nothing to stop them, so long as RPA is not the landlord.  The "300 yard rule" does seem to indicate and ensure that there will not be any sort of river entertainment district planned for that area.  From a traffic and parking stand-point, I really don't think that's a bad thing.  However, if I were a restaurant owner, I'd welcome some competition as it draws more people to an area.

FWIW, I think Tom is pretty sensitive about the noise issues per lessons learned at the old Blue Rose and I don't see anything which would indicate that the new Blue Rose will be dominated by a motorcycling clientele any more than runners, bicyclists, walkers, and gawkers.  BRC has been gone eight years, everyone has found different watering holes in that time.  

Move your shaded circle to position the restaurant within its center. That will include the 21st street bridge, the law offices and part of Veterans. Probably no big deal, but any visions of a Central Park type area with small vendors, creatives and micro entrepreneurs selling Tacos, hot dogs, snow cones or art is nil. Honestly, it doesn't seem very capitalist to me. Unless they have described just what kind of competition is not allowed. Only the parties involved know at this time what those limitations are.

Rivers Edge was very defensive about their perimeter, actually roping it off during festivals to protcct what they thought were business interlopers that RPA had given permission (tacit or informally) to operate. She was not into cross promoting or sharing the area. Really, a very different operation based on really old connections to board members.

So? Invest less money or take more risk. This is public property being leased out for private profit. This is a protected, prime piece of property that they're investing in.

WB, keep in mind this was a Tulsa Whirled summary of the lease.  Hopefully, I'll run into Tom sometime soon and see if he will provide a little clarification.

I hope you're right. There are lots of assumptions you're making too. RPA has lots of influence with its surrounding areas, as well as the Riverview district. This would preclude a ferry boat for instance that may desire to dock and serve food/drink. With the dam at Sand Springs providing more consistent depth at Zink, that is very feasible.

Anyway, its a better restaurant potential than what was there.

I centered my circle on the old Rivers Edge, not knowing exactly where the new place is going to be.  And people are probably right in pointing out that a lease with the RPA has no binding authority on anywhere but River Parks land. 

Tom ran off the bikers well before he shut down the Blue Rose....He had some help from the Crow Creek owner as well....People on Harleys  dont make good customers for the most part there are a few exceptions not many......

Does any one know the exact spot for the construction or has it already started?
 As for the 300 yard buffer, maybe he wants to keep the park as it is and incorperate Rivers Edge into the property to bring in and promote music and art events. I like the BRC design over the Elliot Nelson design because to me the structure tries to incorperate the river and the park and architecturely it has some resemblance to some of the neighborhoods in the area.

Anyway just my $.02

I may be a bit biased with my interest in mid-century modern design, the new BRC looks very MCM to me, ergo I like it quite well.

You're right, my bad. I to am a fan of MCM having gone to school with friends who grew up in Lortondale. I love the fact that Phoenix has a MCM area that is preserved as a historical area. Wasn't there another area near the old Apache Drive In near Apache and Harvard that was also MCM? It was Just south and east of TCC.

Anyway, BOT. I credit Nelson for including the look of the new BOK Center, it just seemed too intrusive to the park. I just tend to think the BRC wants to keep the park enviroment in front. I tihink it lends itself to promoting events in the park, or come have lunch and then walk it off on the trails.

Some mor info from Urban Tulsa
 http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A27002 (http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A27002)

Just wish they had more of the site plan drawings, and they intend to keep Rivers Edge as a freestanding part of the BRC.

"There are many components to this," Dittus said. "It's a unique lease negotiation situation because it's publicly owned land. So our ability to create a viable entity down there depends on a lot of different factors. For us to maximize our ability to create tax revenue for the city depends on the hours we can operate. So there's the curfew issue to be discussed."

Another point up for negotiation is the fate of the existing River's Edge building, the small facility from which a self-service restaurant was run at the site from 1996 to 2008. Dittus said the Swamphouse group would like to maintain that entity as a freestanding addition to the Blue Rose, serving as a place where park users could purchase items without coming to the restaurant.

"We want to enhance the River Parks as it exists by catering to not just the people we'll be bringing in to the restaurant, but the people who already use the park," he said. "Eventually, we'd like to open a skate rental and bike rental and give people the opportunity for an energy bar or a bottle of water."

That's actually off Mohawk Blvd. near Harvard or maybe further west.  I think it was called Lakeside or something like that.  It's near the old incinerator house along Bird Creek, I think.  Been awhile since I cruised through that hood.  It was getting very rough.

Judging from the location, it looks like it's just north/west of the 23rd bridge.

Google Maps shows just trees and a parking lot in that area.  I'm guessing they'll expand that lot and landscape.

Oh, and 300 yards isn't even a fifth of a mile.  That seems like a reasonable request to keep the roach coaches away without impinging on other uses.

As of today, they still have not broken ground on this. Don't think they're going to make their goal of " patrons eating burgers and other meals by Feb 15". Hope this doesn't drag out long. I love that area and miss the River's Edge.

QUESTION:

A little birdy recently told me that Dittus may be balking at the originally proposed pier style design for the new Blue Rose due to cost considerations.  It was also relayed that those considerations were never fully explored prior to the proposal.  True, this is heresay but for the sake of argument...

That proposal was one of two, the other presented by Elliott Nelson.  In March, Dittus projected the startup costs, which include construction, at $392,000. An additional $250,000 will be added from the 2006 third-penny sales tax for infrastructure improvements (Tulsa World).

So, if he were to change the design, would that have possibly changed the minds of the Tulsa River Parks Authority in their selection?  Would it have changed yours?

Only thing I'll add is I've been skeptical that total start-up and construction could be done for $392K ever since it was announced.  I'm wondering if they threw a dart at costs at the last minute to meet the RFP deadline and someone missed about $200 to $300K in costs.

Location of Restaurant is west of the existing parking lot and there is an extension of the existing parking lot to the north. 

I was thrown by their cost estimates too. It wouldn't suprise me one bit if the pier work alone cost 100-150 thousand.  Not like they are making a deck out in your back yard. What really floored me was the time estimate for completion. It was absolutely absurd. Noooo way. I hope they get it done, but I would guess the cost to easily be around 600,000 to do something well, in relation to the rendering they have.

Our estimates might even be conservative, more I think about everything that would go into building and equipping such a venture.  FAIK, the only thing Tom kept from his Brookside location was the sign and rights to the name.  I believe all equipment stayed put, so it's not like he's got a warehouse full of restaurant equipment sitting around, that I'm aware of.

Piers OK for riverside cafe
With river-building approval obtained, work on the Blue Rose Cafe is set to begin in early 2010.
 
 
By P.J. LASSEK World Staff Writer
Published: 11/29/2009  2:19 AM
Last Modified: 11/29/2009  4:12 AM

The Army Corps of Engineers has cleared the way for the Blue Rose Cafe to sit on piers overlooking the Arkansas River just north of the 21st Street Bridge.

Construction is expected to begin after the first of the year on the full-service restaurant nestled along the river's east bank.

"There is a real buzz out there and people are getting real excited," said Tom Dittus, the owner of the Blue Rose Cafe, which once was a popular spot on Brookside in the 1990s.

"The visibility of the project is just amazing. It's going to be a real jewel down there," he said. "I just can't believe I get to do this."

Completion of the restaurant is planned for late spring or early summer.

"I'm working with some really smart people. All I know how to do is pop cold beer and flip hamburgers," Dittus quipped.

"It's going to be a great place to hang out."

Obtaining a 404 permit from the corps, which regulates activities on the waterways, was necessary because the design has the restaurant anchored to piers set into the river bed in a small cove area, said Keith Franklin, the owner of LandPlan Consultants, which is assisting with the project.

"Now that the corps hurdle has been cleared, the project can move forward," he said.

In addition to the main restaurant, the project includes renovating the small cabana-style structure that once housed the River's Edge Bistro and Cafe.

The total project is estimated to cost $685,000, of which $250,000 will come from 2006 third-penny sales tax funds for infrastructure improvements such as lowering the trail a few feet, expanding the parking lot and extending utilities.

Of the estimated $435,000 in private funds, about $350,000 will go toward the main restaurant, the Blue Rose Cafe, and $85,000 will be used to renovate the cabana to serve trail users with takeout food and beverages, said Ted Reeds, the architect for the project.

Dittus said the cabana will be named Elwood's after the Blue Rose's penguin mascot. A naming contest was held in the mid-1990s at the Brookside site.

The renovation of Elwood's will begin this week, mostly involving cosmetic fixes with the exception of replacing the roof and repairing termite damage, Reeds said.

Not only will Elwood's be a takeout eatery, it also will sell Frisbees, suntan lotion, fishing gear, sunglasses and other park necessities, Dittus said.

"The cabana structure wasn't part of the initial plan, but it had enough presence and history that we decided to include it, knowing that it would enhance the Blue Rose experience," he said.

Reeds said the Blue Rose group will clean up and maintain the restrooms at the cabana area until the city builds a new restroom area to be located closer to 17th Street, north of the nearby playground.

Elwood's is expected to open by Christmas and will continue to feature musicians as it did before, Dittus said.

He said the Blue Rose team is going all-out on the restaurant with a great concept and location.

Reeds said the "idea of the cafe is to put it on the river — to make it part of the park and the river at the same time — bring river to land."

The restaurant deck is designed to allow patrons to overlook the river and watch the sunset or watch the activities in the park.

The Blue Rose design is "a tribute to ranch-style homes that are so prevalent in Tulsa," Reeds said.

"I think the style fits on the river. And with the horizontal lines and shallow roof pitch, it will nestle in there more comfortably rather than having a giant museum there," he said.

"We kept it simple — simple and elegant."

The concept is designed to be light and airy, with the seating area surrounded by windows that are operable for natural ventilation, Reeds said

Franklin said the alignment of the River Parks trail will not change, but it will be lowered a few feet in a section in front of the restaurant to allow trail users to go underneath a pedestrian bridge that connects the parking lot to the cafe's main entrance.

The parking lot will be raised to the level of Riverside Drive. It currently sits lower, Franklin said.

The parking lot also will be expanded to the north to include an additional 23 spaces, he said.

Trail users and patrons arriving by car will access the Blue Rose Cafe by the bridge. There also will be stair access from the lower deck near the water.

The parking lot, utility relocations and trail adjustment will be done by the city and the work is expected to occur in early 2010 through the bidding process, Franklin said.

For more than a decade, the Blue Rose Cafe was a popular restaurant in Brookside. Dittus closed the restaurant in 2001 to dedicate his time and resources to his late brother, who at the time was undergoing cancer treatments in Germany.

The cafe will offer a menu and drinks similar to its previous fare.

I bumped into Tom outside the Soundpony Friday night and he said the time frame for Elwood's is February.  He also said there's a phase II to the project in which he hopes to include a dock on the river amongst other ideas he's got.  I'd love nothing more than to finish a workout by rowing a single racing shell over to have a beer and Blue Rose Special.  ;D

But, but, but,,,, I thought we were told that the new Blue Rose restaurant was to begin construction this last Sept, and be done by February?  ???   The papers and newscasters reported this without the slightest doubt or question while the rest of us were flabbergasted and amazed at such incredible claims.  One figured they must have had some inside info that the rest of us didn't which would have enabled the fruition of the proffered, miraculous claims?  Right?  Perhaps the reporters asked the developer how on earth he was going to be able to get the restaurant built and up and running in such an incredibly short amount of time and were told that the restaurant was already being built in a secret location and would be flown in via helicopter or something? Supriiiiiiise!  And all of the rest of you "non reporter" types thought we were crazy (or dense) for reporting those amazing claims without question (like they aaalways seem to).   8)  

Next we'll find off-duty beer cart girls in a rubber raft running the drinks out to you mid-race.

I would love nothing more than watching you try to get BACK IN your single shell after drinking. 

Don't drink and scull.  Boat flips when tipsy.

Maybe I'll be the one to invent rigger floats...LOL! Or better make that a rec single instead!  You really should come back out and row next year.

Make the outriggers retractable so they're only out when you need them.

In rowing geek, the "riggers" are what the oars attach to, so they are necessary all the time...

OK  Our dingy from years ago just had oar-locks. 

In that case, design yourself some outrigger floats.  I am thinking of training wheels for a bicycle in terms of function.

Your situation reminds me of a Smothers Brothers song.  It talks about boatmen and their oars.  They kept their oars in an oar house......

Passed by Elwoods on my run Monday. Already fenced off with some roof work going on.

Update in the Tulsa World today:
http://tiny.cc/JCpYa (http://tiny.cc/JCpYa)

Just wondering if they will sell health food and juices since it's in a natural ('ceptin' the view of Holley and  AEP) public park and recreational area...

Odd that they evicted the rivers edge under the guise of tearing down a warnout structure... and now they are rehabbing that structure for essentially the same use, but Ron by the same people as the new cafe.

Why not just allow rivers edge to remain?

Because then the city would have to have spent money to fix up the structure and they prefer not to be in the landlord business.

maybe because the food was inedible.

As I recall it, and I was at most of the RPA Board meetings about then, the Riversedge leaseholders informed RPA that they were shutting it down.

I went by Elwood's (the former River's Edge) last week and there was a big crowd and live music.  It doesn't appear they have started on the actual restaurant yet though, does anyone know when they plan to start?  This article from early March announcing the Elwood's opening indicates they were hoping to start in April and be finished by August.  I fear if they miss this window, which it looks like they have, they will stall and build over winter and then open next spring.  It doesn't make sense for them to open in late fall or winter.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100310_11_A8_PatQui291238&archive=yes (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20100310_11_A8_PatQui291238&archive=yes)

Sources on Facebook indicate they're shooting for a September opening. 

I chatted with Tom about it a few weeks ago when we stopped in for lunch on our bikes.  He said the original cost estimates released to the TW were off by a good margin.  It's taken a little longer to round up the funding and get the engineering done.  Floyd is correct on the time line.  It's great to have Elwoods open for now to people (and dog) watch.

Next time you see Tom ask if they can take a firehose to the women's room each day before opening.

I'm afraid I can't get my wife to step anywhere close to that place again after the first visit.

Did they have a pylon in the turlet? This was the mens room a few weeks ago:

Time for a chat with Tom

I was amazed that they did nothing to the restrooms before reopening. I don't care if the restrooms are RPA's responsibility they are the only ones for customers. How hard would it have been to use a powerwasher everywhere then do some painting and provide a little TP. I mean they toke the time to paint and work on the outside of the buildings.

I've not been by in a while.  Any noticeable progress for Blue Rose?

Any progress in making the Elwood’s bathrooms slightly less horrific?

No and No

Maybe you guys should start using the womens.  I won't say it was great, but I am a picky pottier, will cry in pain holding it before I would ever use potajohn . . . but they weren't unbearable, for being outdoors and used by people who may or may not know what indoor plumbing is like anymore. 

There were also signs saying new bathrooms were being built, a block or two away maybe.

I could see NO evidence of new work being done on the restaurant. 

That's the issue...I have little in the care department as long as there's a hole in the wall or floor for it to run down into. 

My wife on the other hand...We've been once since it's been Elwood's.  We will be back as soon as my wife believes there is an OCD compliant lady's room.

A functioning soap dispenser would be a step in the right direction...probably going to have to wait a while on that one.

I got some hand sanitizer in my Tulsa Tough goodie bag Mrs. T is welcome to  ;)

Glad we hooked up Friday night, Blue Dome is hard to beat as a race venue, though the party on Crybaby Hill is a total gas.

She's got loads of sanitizer.  I think it was the hand to hand combat with the vermon that repelled her.

Backatcha

From about a month ago:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=334&articleid=20100515_11_A3_Anarch693471&archive=yes

Oh, and those construction cost figures they cited in the article?  Nowhere close to reality, more like $1.2mm

I'm looking forward to seeing them start soon.  Although December is an interesting time to open a riverfront restaurant..

The design is really cool, I hope they stick to it.  The fact that it juts out over the water is a big plus.
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2010/20100515_a3art.jpg)

The World Article makes me wonder if we awarded the space to the right people.

And if you think this is going to open this year...
I'd be very surprised if it opens in 2011

Not a hater but....I do not have confidence of the developers on this project. I dont think it should be Blue Rose either. Great location, let's get it moving! Thus far: FAIL.

I've heard some rumbling on this.  I think their might be a new developer involved.

Not to be Blue Rose?

The name used was Blue Rose.

Looks like work is getting started, they have orange construction fencing going up around the site and have moved in a large dumpster...

Sounds just like when they ran off tent city down by the river.

I noticed last nite that they had cut down the trees in that area, put up their Crossland sign, complete with artist's rendering and appear to be ready to start something.

That is a good sign.  I walked by with my wife, who is not from Tulsa and is slowly getting to know the city, a few weeks ago.  She wondered why there weren't more places like River's Edge/Elwood's by the river in midtown.  This will be a nice draw, and maybe someday there can be something similar on the west bank with the great skyline view. 

We'd have that if the River Vote had passed. Tulsa Landing would have been well under construction by now...  :-\

The islands thing?

No, not the islands thing. The River vote thing.


The fact that people still get the two projects confused tells a lot about why a lot of people voted it down (at least in the 'burbs). I've talked to dozens of people who have said they're glad "those islands in the river" got voted down.

That was never up for a vote, but because of the media attention it got, people associated it with the ballot initiative, the $150mm Kaiser donation and the Tulsa Landing project.

Tulsa Landing was proposed by the developer of the Branson Landing. It would've been great.

Agreed, the confusion with the islands killed it.

Oh well, maybe once Blue Rose is up and running a developer will come in and pester the city for a TIF and build on the other side.

Don't rip me about the TIF...you know that's how we do things 'round these parts.

Hey, they work. Tulsa Hills would be here without it.

Hopefully the next Vision proposal in 2016 (when the current tax needs to be renewed) includes a slew of river projects.  With the new Kaiser-funded trails/park improvements and planned extensions, the QT park, new I-244 bridges, and low water dams in Sand Springs and Jenks along with improvements to the one at Zink Lake funded with V2025 there will be more momentum, IMO, for the once skeptical public to accept new river projects.  And hopefully no Islands or similar proposal comes out right before the vote confusing people.  

Someone's already looking at the other side and you wouldn't believe who it is, or what's to be proposed.  Not public knowledge yet, and I don't want to share what I hope is just rumor.

If you're hoping it's a rumor, that scares me.



And it makes me think it's Wal-Mart or something like it, because that would be one of the worst possible uses for the site.

Hmm...Bell's?   ;)

The Mid-Con Plant is the key to redevelopment of the west bank.  That and getting rid of the Sec 8 apartments along Jackson. 

That's unlikely, as they're spending millions, adding awnings and dormers to make them look nicer.

Not even close.

Does interested party have a Bum rap?

It will surface soon enough, and by that time it may be a viable project.

Those aren't as bad as the ones south of 23rd that aren't getting a facelift.

(http://shadowpress.org/Giuliani%20Hand%20on%20Head.jpg)

Let's hope.

Yep putting lipstick on a pig.

I thought that was a pit bull

I think both are accurate.  ;)

Actually if you could combine the concrete plant (I remember when it was McMichael) with the park and floating ampitheater you could develop something nice, but then again with the area just west being what it is would present a problem. I'm not condemming the whole area, just the fact that there are parts that might make it less inviting.

Exactly why just a huge riverside park stretching from 23rd north to the Westport apartments with a larger amphitheater/events center in the middle by the "cove" would be a good fit.  Focus new apartment/townhome development on the other side of the river.  Something like Zilker Park in Austin would be perfect:
(http://www.austintowers.net/at/condos/austin_downtown_condo/zilker_park_residences_files/Zilker_Park_Austin.jpg)

with open space for concerts/athletics and maybe a sculpture park like Olympic Park in Seattle:
(http://fivenonblondes.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/seattle-sculputure-park.jpg)

I drove by today and they are definitely getting started...great to see.

Took a peek at the location on my run today. About a half dozen concrete footings/pads are complete. Coming along...

Snapped a few pics while out on a bike ride yesterday...

(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4106/4840831975_e45046e266.jpg)

(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4084/4841447386_5af2bcfeb6.jpg)

Any idea what's going on just north of the playground, about a block north of where the blue rose will be? They've marked off a big grassy area with construction fencing.

I think it was planned as more parking.

The "Progress as Promised" sign in the construction area north of the playground says "17th Street Bathroom", maybe to replace the ones by Elwood's?

On could only hope, there's not enough bleach in Tulsa County to fix the biggest issue with the existing bathrooms.

Witnessed a guy taking a dump on the floor there once.  About 4 feet in front of the toilet.  I guess he didn't trust the cleanliness of the toilet seat.

How long'd ya watch?

Until you finished.

Hot

Sorry.

(http://spc.fotolog.com/photo/44/23/122/jav_on_road/1233947043158_f.jpg)

(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:go7TblARJAAk8M:http://www.scrutinyhooligans.us/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/hot-carl.gif&t=1)

(http://rustytees.com/store/images/cleveland-steamer1.gif)

(http://www.ourkitchensink.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/dirty-sanchez-our-kitchen-sink.jpg)

(http://www.stupidpicturesvideosandmusic.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/No-Dumping.jpg)

Snapped a few pictures while walking the dog this morning... They have started on the steal work...
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4107/4992622637_042abcabf6.jpg)
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4091/4993209312_cb1df552af.jpg)

It will have a nice view sitting up so high like that. I am curious as to what will sit under it (other than transients and geese). The water rarely gets any higher than the first set of piers.

Theft problems already, eh?

Tents.

For the tourist.

Oooh! a restaurant that juts out over the dirt!  How kewl is that  ;D

Depends on how far down the dirt is.  Think Grand Canyon, Great Gorge etc.

Gotta have a glass floor though.

And it's Royal Gorge.  Awesome place.

I love the river, but this ain't no Royal Gorge. ;)

Same river, though.

I'm guessing the first set of piers would be about 60,000 cfs which is the typical 'it happens about every year' high water or even perhaps 90,000 which is the max the CORPS goes to for normal flood releases.  However; the near river development design criteria established in the corridor master plan is for 1986 (flood of record) elevation plus 1 foot... and from the photo this looks about right to me. I'm guessing the first set of piers would be about 60,000 or even 90,000 cfs which is the typical max flow the CORPS goes to for normal flood releases.  However; the near river development design criteria established in the corridor master plan is for 1986 (flood of record) elevation plus 1 foot... and from the photo this looks about right to me.

Kirby, turn off the reverb  ;)

Another pic looking south-southwest.  You can see the water line on the bridge supports which indicates the area beneath the restaurant could be underwater during high flows.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/bg918/river.jpg)

I wonder if they still plan on putting in the dock shown in this site plan:
(http://www.moderntulsa.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/bluerose.jpg)

I understand that they have to put it high enough to withstand a 1986 level flood. I was merely pointing out that the area underneath it could be problematic 90% of the year. It could be shielded off with concrete walls or something. Just wondering if they have considered its likely use as haven for drug bunnies, geese and transients.

Concrete walls would pretty much ruin the aesthetics of it being on piers over the water.  I would expect Tom will keep it pretty well policed under the restaurant.  Not much you can do to keep the geese out.  Some sort of fencing in lieu of a wall will just be a debris trap when the water is up.

Maybe install a few of these?

(http://images.travelpod.com/users/cthrasher/rtw_2006-2007.1172457540.my_pics_233_464.jpg)

that's unique... LOL

From their facebook:

(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs636.snc4/59664_1425135835775_1454148809_31025131_4227418_n.jpg)

The river is pretty low right now.  If we have the same high flows like we did a few months ago (pretty typical in late spring/early summer) the entire area underneath the restaurant will be underwater.  I'm still curious how they plan to bridge the trail from the parking lot to the restaurant.

Sorry, but it won't be underwater during the flows you describe. I run by there three times a week. I put my kayak in and out there. I took on passengers for my airboats and pontoons there as well, so I know the area at most all levels. The water level at that point is low enough through most of the year that I can beach my kayaks easily there. They will have to either fence it off or enforce no loitering rules to keep the area clear. Course, neither the bums nor the geese pay attention to those rules. ;)

When I passed by there Thursday, there is indeed the makings of a bridge connecting to what looks like the upper level of the structure. BTW, I canoed past there today and the view of the structure from the west side of the river is overpowering. It makes the pier look quite small. I expect it will be a big hit.

Updated pics from the TW this past week.  Really looking forward to this opening in the next few months.

(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2010/20101209_E1EXTERIOR1209.jpg)
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2010/20101209_E2DITTUS1209.jpg)

I like the looks of it! It really looks good!

Looking great!

I'm gonna like this place.  The large wide patio was a great idea.

Have to love the roll up doors.....

reminds me of Los Cabos out by the Bass Pro.  I do like the roll up doors for sure.

Like Red Rock Canyon.  Great for a sunset and a beer!

Now if we can just get rid of the concrete plant across the river...   :)

Some better lighting on the 21st Street bridge would be nice too.  Some LED's lighting the arches like the bridge below (in Buffalo, NY) would be uber cool.
(http://www.buffalorising.com/assets_c/2009/06/Peace%20Bridge-thumb-298x298-4029.jpg)

or for our new I-244 bridge (which would be clearly visible from Blue Rose), something similar to the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis
(http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/9913/35wbridge02pu4.jpg)

For $50mm or knowing the right person at the city or county, it can be done...

Do they hide the doors in the ceiling when the doors are open?  Otherwise, sitting inside would seem like sitting in my garage but with a better view.

Start a fund raiser.  I'll chip in my $.02   
 ;D

Only if blue rose patrons have x-ray vision.

Honestly, either of those might be better than the garish Metal Halide floodlighting like on the Jenks bridge.
I would go with another color besides blue for environmental reasons (circadian rhythms of river wildlife) if they are on all night.

Do you have a particular choice or just not blue?

Green is close to blue (ROY G BIV), might be interesting and less damaging.  I am not fond of the orangish street lights. Red might be OK but it's getting in the difficult to see range if I remember correctly from B&W film darkroom days. Yellowish would kind of match incandescent lighting and not be too interesting.  I would say street light orange would not be interesting either.

Black lighting with velvet panthers and Led Zeppelin playing from loud speakers please.

"Black" light is really UV, kind of a deep violet.  Maybe some non-combusted particles above the aqueous surface would be appropriate.

If you were lighting in an environmentally conscious way, the trick would be to avoid colors associated with dawn for any all-night lighting.
The bluish hues of dawn are what resets the body's clock and stops the production of melatonin.
That being said, warmer colors are less likely to adversely affect the rhythms of animals and people.

Aesthetically, blue is interesting at night highlighting features, but areas washed in blue are cold and uninviting.
 

They could just paint the bridge with that glow in the dark paint.  Then it would just fade away in the night.

Why do we have to light the bottom of a bridge anyway? 

So the hobos can find their crack pipes and pints?

+1

. . .in that case we should just heat the bottom of the bridge too.

Nope, I draw the line at lighting only, no heat.

You're right.  That would encourage them to be more homeless!

There are no plans (that I know of) to do it, I just think it's a cool idea and something that would be highly visible from the Blue Rose and any future development on the west bank.  OKC had OG+E install lights on the Byers bridge near downtown, it looks awesome at night.

(http://www.smithlighting.com/lightscape/byers2.jpg)
(http://www.smithlighting.com/lightscape/byers1.jpg)

Yeah. . .I don't see that ending well.

I'll check back in a few years.

I'm thinking that might cause a few OCD cranksters to lean over and fall to their deaths if we did that here.

I'd just like a guarantee that it will function with the same unfaltering reliability as the lighting on the Expo building has. :o

Bridges are a maintenance nightmare.  Tulsa has an excellent track record of maintaining them (sarcasm).  I don't think it's a good idea to complicate the matter. 

It didn't help that the county contracted with a company that BK'd soon after the lights were installed.  Well vetted apparently.

Is the Expo, er QT Center not lighted anymore?

As far as I can tell the lights are there but inoperable and too expensive to repair.

4toFix $$$ well spent?

That was a decision poorly made.  It looked cool when it was working.

No loss there.....

Blue Rose is getting active on FB.  "the day is near"

According to Tulsa World, soft opening in February, grand opening by March 1.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20110114_11_A13_CUTLIN393787

Hopefully by then the weather will be warmer and the river will be full..

Looking good in the snow...

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/bg918/bluerose.jpg)

I found these on FB...enjoy:

(http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/hs065.snc6/167572_563143269475_26400070_32299439_6055834_n.jpg)
(http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/hs274.snc6/180259_563143204605_26400070_32299436_2900085_n.jpg)

No customers with hot chocolate?

here's the full album with a few more photos from around the Blue Rose - http://www.flickr.com/photos/tulsamatt/sets/72157625959853072/

Blue Rose is now open!

(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2011/20110205_bluerose0205p1.jpg)


Something tells me those jelly-jar lights are going to be hard on more than just the eyes...

From the TW:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/scene/article.aspx?subjectid=274&articleid=20110205_39_D2_CUTLIN931782 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/scene/article.aspx?subjectid=274&articleid=20110205_39_D2_CUTLIN931782)

You should change your name to negative nellie....How do you make it on a day to day baisis.....

Inspiration?

But seriously, the lighting there is uninspired. 
What were they thinking, prison-yard chique?

What would be a better solution Patric?  Is there a similar outdoor restaurant that has better lighting in Tulsa?

I haven't been to the Blue Rose yet but plan on going this week or more likely next weekend.  Anyone been yet?

There are so many ways they could improve that lighting; even a string of commercial-grade christmas-style lights along the eave would be better than that brutal, bare-bulb approach.   

(http://www.terragalleria.com/images/france/fran30571.jpeg)
(http://www.longfence.com/assets/Image/Bar.jpg)
(http://www.terragalleria.com/images/us-ca/usca43419.jpeg)
(http://homedesigndecorating.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Outdoor-Dining-Lounge-Modern-Contemporary-Mountain-House-Design.jpg)
(http://wwwdelivery.superstock.com/WI/223/1959/PreviewComp/SuperStock_1959-1532.jpg)
(http://www.washingtonian.com/block_dbimages/17814/Picture%204.png)
(http://cache4.asset-cache.net/xc/200398056-001.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=6C4008C0FD9EB5A57E41837DECF20E13792B288278A3E769A5A3A771EFE6A418EC7C5022FB410D56)
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/103/277548212_1ab81792d2.jpg?v=0)
(http://www.greenearthlighting.com/images/glarebuster_example_1.jpg)
(http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o160/robojsl/TKK%20Restaurant/IMG_0049.jpg)

Even the outdoor seating at Panda Express is better lit...
Dim those industrial things and use them for the clean-up lights.

We're here.  I think it's great. 

Hankering for a Blue Rose Special. Anyone else want to meet for lunch today?

We were there again yesterday.

I know it was largely due to nice weather following the nasty weather we've been having but it was packed.

Travis and Jay were slammed behind the bar and they were only serving food inside.  Both decks were full and it was a great preview for upcoming nice days.

They ran out of many brands of beer by 5.

If the people with the means don't see a reason to develop the river now, I'll be at a loss.

Daughter #1 turned 21 on the 2nd but due to weather ever since with her in Norman and me here, we had not gotten together for her birthday yet.  Finally she came home this weekend and wanted to meet at the BR at 7pm on Saturday.  I tried to discourage her as there would be six of us going and I figured we were looking at a one hour wait for a table at a minimum then no telling on getting served.  Turns out, we got six seats on the corner of the long common concrete table just behind the bar which was actually perfect for our group.  Food and service were timely, and quality was good.  My mom went on and on about the blackened chicken on spinach salad.  FMC and daughter #2 both had black bean burgers which were great.  I had the marinated chicken which was just as I remembered from the old days.

I have a client coming in from out of town tomorrow and can't wait to take him there for lunch.

Tom has something with great potential on his hands, adequate and attentive wait staff is going to be a large part of the ultimate success.  I'm confident they will have as many people as they can possibly serve.  If service gets lousy it won't take long for everyone to hear about it.

I think it would be cool to see a couple other restaurants there next to the Blue Rose, north of Elwood's.  A string of 3-4 uniquely different buildings with different types of food overlooking the river and an enlarged Festival Park and amphitheatre on the other side.   :)

I think there's a non-compete near BR.

Ah yes, I remember now.  Cannon_fodder posted a picture showing the approximate limits:
(http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=12920.0;attach=1241;image)

The city blew a potential sales tax bonanza by allowing competing interests to be written out of their contract.  Personally, if I were the owner of a restaurant and bar where there is basically zero density of other entertainment/eating venues, I'd want to build in some competition as it brings more people to the area.  Much as like has evolved slowly in the Brady and Blue Dome districts.  I think those are great example that critical mass helps ensure staying power.

I've got mixed emotions on over-commercialization and the clash of restaurant/bar patrons with people utilizing the trails.  Even though they built the pedestrian over-pass to get to the front door it's a total CF parking and getting in without the potential for conflict at the moment.  I like the idea that we finally have a real example of cool river development within the city of Tulsa, yet there is one part of me that fears eventually losing an unobstructed view of the river from the River Parks due to too much commercial development.  Basically I'd like to see more development in this area, but I'm afraid of what price recreational users of the area might pay for that.

I don't think the city had that much to do with it. RPA as an authority only receives part of their funding from the COT. The rest is from the County, donations and renting out the grounds for festivals etc. They operate pretty independent of either entity. I agree with you that it was a typical short sighted decision to blunt any other competition. Putting a time period on the non compete would have been a better idea. The success of BR would have created demand for more well planned restaurants, but not now.

The solution is to designate certain areas for certain functions along the river so that clusters of similar activities can feed off each other. Some areas would simply be off limits for any development other than a path. That makes too much sense.

There could be another restaurant built at the north end of the "300 yard bubble" by the parking lot at 17th & Riverside.  A couple restaurants could go in on the river in that area from 15th to 17th and still be close to Blue Rose.

Three football fields away? Yeah, i guess I could stumble along that far.

Another hindrance has been the refusal to allow alcoholic drinks on park property. The 19th location has an exception. To continue that across from Sophian, residential and senior communities, might not be viewed favorably. ;)

Something like this project One Architecture designed for the Blue Rose site would be cool further north:
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2009/20090311_watershed0311.jpg)

http://www.1architecture.com/projects/watershed.htm (http://www.1architecture.com/projects/watershed.htm)

It doesn't do anything for me but if someone wanted it I wouldn't care too much.

Blue Rose is reopening as the Sandbar Cafe at the end of May.  I wonder if the non-compete clause is still in place in the 300 yd radius?  I'd still like to see this area built up more with an additional restaurant and/or coffee shop around the cove.  This area makes sense to offer kayak rentals once the dam project is completed and Zink Lake is always full. 

https://tulsaworld.com/entertainment/dining/sandbar-cafe-rises-from-blue-rose-cafes-roots-along-the-arkansas-river/article_9f2f72e4-b2bc-11eb-beb8-433351be9ad9.html#tracking-source=home-top-story-1 (https://tulsaworld.com/entertainment/dining/sandbar-cafe-rises-from-blue-rose-cafes-roots-along-the-arkansas-river/article_9f2f72e4-b2bc-11eb-beb8-433351be9ad9.html#tracking-source=home-top-story-1)

This is a cool concept on the S Platte River trail in Littleton, CO: a bike-up coffee shop.  Of course it also has parking but caters to trail and park-users.  I think something like this would be a hit right off the trail either around Yard Bar/Sand Bar or further north closer to 17th.  Something like The Cirque pop-up at 14th & Lewis could even work for this.

Nixon's on the trail in Littleton
(https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/18/45/ca/cf/plenty-of-space-for-you.jpg)

I've been told the leases for these have none compete clauses that I believe were put in by River Parks that basically doesn't allow any other types of retail pretty much from Gathering Place up toward Southwest Blvd area. Seems pretty dumb to me, because this part of the trails is a prime spot to do some additional well thought out retail like a coffee shop, etc. especially in that area you mention north toward 18th/17th where that parking lot is. I'd love to see that parking lot infilled with commercial space like that Nixon's for example you showed. That lot is really unnecessary given all the on street parking on Riverside is always empty. You could even build out angled parking along Riverside if needed to get additional parking that would be lost from that lot being developed with some small retail spaces. 

I'd be curious if the non-compete is only for bars/restaurants or if a coffee shop could operate.  With the Cosmopolitan across the street at the 17th St parking lot and other large apartment buildings in the area I think it would do really well with a combination of neighborhood and trail user traffic.  That is something that is definitely missing in Tulsa, a trailside coffee shop with views of the river.

The re-opened Sandbar is really good, give it a try. 

Service is now more fast-casual style with ordering at the bar or the deck window.

I'm not sure and I believe it was RiverParks that wanted the non compete and not the tenants... like RiverParks was worried they'd open a similar concept close by. I just remember being totally baffled when it was told to me and it didn't make any sense why it was in the leases.

Lone Wolf is taking over the Sandbar and Yard Bar with plans to open in spring 2024.  They plan to offer some of their staple menu items but this location will be different than the others, and will have a larger bar offering. 

https://tulsaworld.com/life-entertainment/local/food-drink/lone-wolf-to-take-over-sandbar-restaurant-in-river-parks/article_b5d2d0a8-3d4e-11ee-8809-bf59cf8146f3.html#tracking-source=home-top-story (https://tulsaworld.com/life-entertainment/local/food-drink/lone-wolf-to-take-over-sandbar-restaurant-in-river-parks/article_b5d2d0a8-3d4e-11ee-8809-bf59cf8146f3.html#tracking-source=home-top-story)